Trim v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Trim v. State

253 S.W.2d 867, 158 Tex. Crim. 126, 1953 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1529

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedJanuary 7, 1953

DocketNo. 26,117

StatusPublished

This text of 253 S.W.2d 867 (Trim v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Trim v. State, 253 S.W.2d 867, 158 Tex. Crim. 126, 1953 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1529 (Tex. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is burglary of a motor vehicle; the punishment, three years.

No statement of facts accompanies the record.

We do find, however, a motion to quash the indictment.

This is a prosecution under Article 1404b, Penal Code, enacted by the last legislature.

The indictment, omitting formal parts, charges: “. . . did then and there unlawfully by force, threats and fraud, break and enter a motor vehicle to-wit: an automobile, there situate and occupied and controlled by William H. Porter, and with the intent then and there fraudulently to take from the said automobile corporeal personal property therein being and belonging to the said William H. Porter from the possession of the said William H. Porter, without his consent and with the intent to deprive the said William H. Porter, the owner of said corporeal personal property, of the value thereof, and to appropriate the same to the use and benefit of him, the said Frank Trim.”

We find the indictment proper under the statute.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is burglary of a motor vehicle; the punishment, three years.

No statement of facts accompanies the record.

We do find, however, a motion to quash the indictment.

This is a prosecution under Article 1404b, Penal Code, enacted by the last legislature.

The indictment, omitting formal parts, charges: “. . . did then and there unlawfully by force, threats and fraud, break and enter a motor vehicle to-wit: an automobile, there situate and occupied and controlled by William H. Porter, and with the intent then and there fraudulently to take from the said automobile corporeal personal property therein being and belonging to the said William H. Porter from the possession of the said William H. Porter, without his consent and with the intent to deprive the said William H. Porter, the owner of said corporeal personal property, of the value thereof, and to appropriate the same to the use and benefit of him, the said Frank Trim.”

We find the indictment proper under the statute.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

253 S.W.2d 867, 158 Tex. Crim. 126, 1953 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1529, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/trim-v-state-texcrimapp-1953.